Grease error on Morgan?

[thedrpepper]

Got another error question on an 1878-CC $1 Morgan I recently obtained.

According to Bowers, the 1878-CC is known for weak strikes in the eagles talons and below.

What doesn't make sense to me is how then the Lettering and mint mark is perfectly clear. To me this reads as a struck through grease error more than weak strike... How could a weak strike (maybe a tilted die?) create the mushy devices in the talons and wreath but not anything below it like the lettering?

Note that the eagle has full breastfeathers, which is what I would typically consider marker of a strong strike.

Additionally, there are what appears to be die chips below the wreath on the left, and at the 1 o'clock mark between the mint mark and the wreath.

Possible some metal flakes got stuck in the grease causing this combination of errors?

Would appreciate your input. Obverse picture is included just so you can see the whole strike!

[occnumis2021]

metal flow into die spaces is a VERY funny/odd thing along with die strike pressure, angle (as you mentioned) etc.

your circled areas are undoubtedly grease/debris strike-through(s).

edited to add: is your coin a PL on one or both sides? looks nice.

adsfasdfsdaf.jpg

[thedrpepper]

Thank you! I appreciate your input. Sounds like you don't believe the wreath/talons/arrows would be a part of this grease mess? Mostly attributed to metal flow weak strike? Very interesting to think about this process.

edited to add: is your coin a PL on one or both sides? looks nice.

I'm glad you noticed. I think it's PL on both sides - I plan on submitting for reconsideration for both the error and the PL designation... Here are some glamor shots I took of the reflectivity

Edit: Redacted barcode from slab image

[occnumis2021]

[QUOTE=thedrpepper;n109535]Thank you! I appreciate your input. Sounds like you don't believe the wreath/talons/arrows would be a part of this grease mess? Mostly attributed to metal flow weak strike? Very interesting to think about this process.


i offer no opinion on this coin about a larger grease/debris strike-through. i've seen so many i (and others) go back and forth on because they can look so similar when the grease is in the die cavities.

been fortune enough to participate in a forum with dozens of active experts in many areas for years so i've seen a lot and one of the things i've seen is a lot of errors. looking at broadstruck coins and double struck revealed interesting things to me and others that i pointed out. you can have a coin like yours, or really weak struck coins that make the dies look kinda lackluster and perhaps a bit worn out for the average coin in the middle to end of a dies life BUT then you see one double struck (out of collar) and you see a coin struck like it was the first off of the dies ! it will show full details, clean surfaces (would grade higher because of both) but because it is a 2nd strike o/c, that doesn't matter much except for study.

we could have more higher quality and better struck coins but it'd probably cut the dies life in half or more (more chips, cracks, cuds, failure, etc) so when seeing things like this, the very first thing is weak strike simply because that is occam's razor and lets not forget, a strike-through of that size is a rather big error and they do happen but most will not be. even back then that would be a lot of crud to accumulate in such a big area w/o falling out right away.

feel free to submit and do the error thing but it is extremely hit-n-miss. look how much potential value you can add (maybe even a bit of peace of mind) vs having a coin you have 2x the value in for cost but only worth 1/2. - but i won't say 100% it isn't a strike through as i don't have it in-hand, just unlikely. if you get that designation, you still have to convince people it was for the bigger areas, not the smaller.

[thedrpepper]

Thank you for the thoughtful reply. I'm still learning so this is all good information. Occams razor is probably worth noting! The die chips are very curious to me, and I'm glad for your expertise on the matter.

I will definitely have to do some more research - the reconsideration submission would mostly be for the PL designation, the error would be a bonus in my opinion!

Thank you again.